After 2012, financial institutions in mainland China entered a period of deregulation of their asset management business. Banks, securities, trusts and other financial institutions are gradually developing cross-market, cross-industry and cross-domain emerging asset management businesses. The structure of asset management products is becoming more and more complex, which makes supervision more difficult. The definition, regulatory system and legal characterization of the asset management industry have remained ambiguous for a long period of time under the sectoral regulation model. At the same time, different regulatory rules apply to the asset management products issued by different financial institutions, resulting in the phenomenon of regulatory arbitrage in the asset management industry, which affects the stability of the overall financial market. The regulatory cost is also increased and the regulatory efficiency is reduced. Therefore, it is difficult to effectively supervise the asset management business in a separate regulatory model, and it is difficult to deal with the risks and problems arising from it. In April 2018, the "Guiding Opinions on the Regulation of Asset Management Business of Financial Institutions" jointly issued by the People's Bank of China, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange in Mainland China started the road to unified regulation of the asset management industry in Mainland China. Although the regulatory models adopted by different countries are different, they all provide unified supervision for asset management business. This is why. The trend is to unify the regulation of the asset management industry. This article is divided into three parts to design a unified regulatory system for asset management products. In the first part, the concept and characteristics of asset management business are used to clarify the legal relationship between the parties in asset management business, and then the legal attributes of asset management business are sorted out. After that, the history of the development of asset management business and the current regulatory system of each industry are summarized, and the operation mode of asset management products issued by various financial institutions is analyzed to find the implied common fiduciary attributes. We analyze the problems of asset management products, asset management business and the financial system through the development history of asset management business in mainland China and analyze why the asset management industry is full of chaos. This will lead to the need for continued reform of the regulatory regime for asset management business. In the second part, by analyzing the reform trend of the asset management market in Mainland China in recent years and reviewing the evolution of financial regulatory reforms in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Korea, and the European Union, we conclude that the two basic objectives of macro-prudential regulation and financial consumer protection are emphasized, and that the financial regulatory reforms in each country also focus on information disclosure and information exchange mechanisms to achieve exchange and sharing in order to improve the transparency of the asset management industry and improve regulation and prevention and control. In addition, in the financial regulatory reform, countries also focus on information disclosure and information exchange mechanisms to achieve communication and sharing, so as to improve the transparency of the asset management industry, improve regulation and prevent and control systemic financial risks. In the third part, the risks and problems of the asset management industry are discussed in the preceding section, and the experience of the reform of the regulatory system in other countries is drawn from to point out the improvement direction and content of the regulatory system of asset management business in mainland China. Firstly, we explore the establishment of a prudential regulatory framework and the establishment of a financial consumer protection system from the perspective of regulatory objectives, and clarify the objectives of both. Secondly, we analyze the way to improve the legal system, including the revision of the Trust Law, the establishment of a fiduciary duty system, and the improvement of the new Securities Law. Finally, the objectives established in the first two sections and the systems to be improved are integrated to build an overall system to implement a coordinated and joint mechanism and improve penetrating regulation.